Subject: Re: Examples needed against Soft Patents
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 15:02:00 +0900

>>>>> "Russell" == Russell McOrmond <russell@flora.ca> writes:

    Russell> *sigh*

    Russell>   Information/mental process patents can not be
    Russell> considered incremental extension of past patent policy

*sigh*

You evidently don't grok "freedom".  *I* am free to consider a mental
process patent an incremental extension, as are many millions of
others, including a series of judges (who actually, if I understand
the reasoning correctly, claim that it is restoration of a franchise
that should have been available all along, but the USPTO incorrectly
and arbitrarily decided otherwise).  *You* must convince *us* (ie,
enough of us to get the legislation abolishing those patents passed)
that either that opinion is untenable (a very difficult task) or that
despite that opinion, this is nevertheless bad policy.

Alternatively you could convince a high enough court to reverse the
"judicial legislation" that forced the PTO to start granting these
patents.

Note that I don't care that you consider the extension of patent
franchise to software etc "extremist."  After all, you are free to
hold and express your opinions.  I do care about the way you shoot
FLOSS advocacy in the foot by advocating shouting it out loud, and so
request that you not do so; it's unnecessary and harmful.

-- 
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences     http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba                    Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
               Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
              ask what your business can "do for" free software.